论文部分内容阅读
先要澄清物权主体与所有权主体的概念范畴,依据我国立法,物权主体与所有权主体在外延上不是一致的,法人在我国可以成为他物权主体,但不能成为所有权主体。这种状况造成逻辑上的混乱。另外要澄清私人与自然人的概念,私人这个词不是严格的法律概念,因为它的内涵虽然意为“私”,但是“私”与“公”的比较从来是相对的,有一定参照前提的,法人中的成员相对于法人是“私”,法人是“公”;而法人相对与国家是“私”,所以用私人所有权取代自然人所有权不科学。应该根据民法的民事主体制度,打破原来的所有权“三分法”,建立新“三分法”。
According to the legislation of our country, the main body of property and the main body of ownership are not consistent in the extension. The legal person can become the main body of real right in our country, but can not become the main body of ownership. This situation creates logistical confusion. In addition, to clarify the concept of private individuals and natural persons, the term private is not a strict legal concept. Although its connotation means “private”, the comparison between “private” and “public” has always been relative and has certain reference. The members of the legal person are “private” relative to the legal person, and the legal person is “the public”; while the legal person is “private” relative to the state, so it is unscientific to replace the ownership of the natural person with private ownership. According to the civil subject system of civil law, we should break the original “third law” of ownership and establish a new “third law.”